Master Plan presentation on the Climate Action Plan to the Water Authority's Board of Directors' Water Planning Committee.

1. Presented by: Ken Weinberg, Director of Water Resources
David Chamberlain, Principal Engineer
Kelley Gage, Principal Water Resources Specialist
San Diego County Water Authority
2013 Master Plan Update, Climate Action Plan
and Supplemental Program EIR

2.  Review Proposed Actions
 Subsequent actions needed to authorize
recommendations included in the Master Plan
 Master Plan Process/Key Conclusions
 Climate Action Plan Conclusions
 Supplemental Program EIR Conclusions
 Staff Recommendation
2
Today’s Agenda

3.  Certify Final Supplemental Program EIR
completed in compliance with CEQA
 Adopt Environmental Findings of Fact and
Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
 Approve the “Proposed Project Modifications”
and Climate Action Plan
 Approve Final 2013 Master Plan Update
 Authorize filing of a Notice of Determination
3
Today’s Proposed Actions

4.  Continues direction established in 2003 Plan
 Complete Emergency Storage Program
 Eliminate bottlenecks in untreated water delivery system
 Integrate Carlsbad Desalination into regional conveyance
 Optimizes existing facilities and minimizes the need for
additional investment
 Storage
 Treatment
 Recommendations recognize significant reductions in future
water demand due to conservation
 Compliance with SBX7-7 20% by 2020
 Downsize, defer, or eliminate projects
 Approximately $700 M in CIP deferred past 2025
4
Facilities Master Plan is a Road Map to
Future Infrastructure Investments

5. Since January 2013
 Water Planning Committee Meetings covering Master Plan
and CAP elements
 9 Regular Committee Meetings
 5 Special Meetings/Workshops
 2 Public Meetings (CEQA Scoping & Hearing)
 Member Agency Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
 6 Meetings (including reservoir coordination meeting)
 3 Workshops since January 2013
 Reviewed and commented on detailed modeling and analysis
results
 Provided input on material presented to Water Planning Committee
5
Stakeholder Involvement - 2013 Master
Plan, CAP and EIR Documents

6. Approved: Supply from the West -Seawater
Desalination
Types of included projects:
 Initial 50 mgd Carlsbad Desalination Project
 Addition of Regional Water Treatment Capacity
 Addition of 100,000 AF of Carryover Storage
 Expansion of Internal System Capacity
 Rehabilitation of Existing Facilities
Historical Context – Certified 2003
Final PEIR
6

7.  Master Plan assumes supply mix contained in 2010 UWMP
 SBX7-7 Gallons Per Capita Day 20% by 2020 Goals achieved
 Continued water use efficiency through 2035 planning horizon
 Member agencies develop recycled water and groundwater
consistent with their UWMPs
 Analyzes effect of additional local supplies beyond 2010 UWMPs
 Developed from member agencies current planning efforts
 City of San Diego IPR/DPR
 Otay Water District Rosarito Seawater Desalination
 North County Agencies non-potable and potable reuse
 Any change to water resources mix is subject of 2015 UWMP
7
Facilities Master Plan Makes No
Recommendations for New Supplies

8.  No specific action recommended to proceed
with Camp Pendleton Desalination or any
Water Authority supply project
 Recommends adaptive management approach
 Continue evaluating feasibility while monitoring
progress of local and imported water supply
projects
 Feasibility-level evaluations are not subject to CEQA
review, and therefore not part of today’s actions
8
Facilities Master Plan Makes No
Recommendations for New Supplies

9. 9
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
.......
2030
+
Address
Untreated
Capacity
Constraint
Address
Potential
Supply
Shortfall
*
*
2015 UWMP
Determine
status of
demand, local
supply,
conservation
Award construction
contract for P3/P4
Conversion
Consider initiating
Permitting for initial
50 MGD Camp
Pendleton Desal
Consider initiating
Camp Pendleton
Desal
Environmental
Contract for Phase 1
IPR awarded.
50% of North County
Recycling under
construction
Financing on Rosarito
Desal closed.
Construction
contract for BDCP
conveyance
awarded
Determine status
of IPR, North
County Recycling
and Rosarito
Desal
Env. Approvals &
Permitting
Determine
status of
BDCP
Conveyance
Permitting
Initial 50 MGD Camp
Pendleton Desal
Implementation
“No Regrets” Adaptive Management Decisions Affecting Long-Term
Conveyance and Supply Projects
Pipeline 3/Pipeline 4 Conversion
Planning , Environmental, Pre-Design
Conveyance
Constraint
Camp Pendleton Desal Option
Pilot Testing , Site Preservation,
Facility Planning
Potential
Supply
Constraint

10.  Approving the 2013 Master Plan does not
authorize specific approval of any project or
funding to proceed with design or
construction
 Funding specific project recommendations will be part of
the upcoming mid-term budget adjustment process and/or
future fiscal year budgets
 Proceeding with any long term recommendation requires
Board approval and additional environmental compliance
10
Follow-up Actions/Decisions Related to
Recommendations in the Master Plan

11. 11
 No supply/demand gaps under normal
weather
 Dependent on member agencies achieving
conservation and local supply targets
 Supply/demand gaps will occur under multi-
dry year weather and MWD water shortage
allocation
 Infrastructure needs influenced by frequency of dry-
weather occurrence and magnitude of dry-weather
shortfall
 Untreated water conveyance utilization
threshold exceeded around 2020
 New infrastructure needed between 2020–2025
 Supply shortage risks increase beyond 2025
 Supply shortage risk compounded with lower local
supply development and conservation
 Assumes Bay-Delta fix for MWD supply reliability
 Member Agency supply projects can resolve most
long-term supply imbalances
Master Plan – Analysis Summary

12.  Carryover Storage. Mitigates dry-weather supply-demand gaps
and further delays new supply development.
 Seasonal Storage. Alleviates peak untreated delivery
constraints. Use varies between 40 and 50 TAF annually.
 ESP Completion. Assures supply reliability throughout the Water
Authority service area.
 CIP Completion. Assures operational reliability. Project scope
reassessed to align with current/projected demand profiles.
 Asset Management. Delivery reliability is predicated on
continued functionality of all components of the existing
aqueduct system.
 System Vulnerability. New isolation valves will reduce supply
disruptions during shutdowns of the aqueduct system.
 Hydroelectric Generation. Development opportunities exist at
multiple locations.
12
2013 Master Plan – Other Key Conclusions

13. Near- and Mid-Term Projects
1. ESP North County Pump Stations
2. ESP San Vicente Pump Station 3rd
Pump Drive and Power Supply
3. Pipelines P3/P4 Conversion
4. Mission Trails Flow Regulatory
Structure
4a. Lake Murray Control Valve
4b. South County Intertie
5. System Storage
6. System Isolation Valves (various
locations)
7. Asset Management Program (various
locations)
8. Facility Planning Studies
Potential Long-Term Projects
1. Pipeline 6
2. Second Crossover Pipeline
3. Camp Pendleton Desalination
4. Colorado River Conveyance
13
Total List of Potential Projects included in
2013 Master Plan Update
1
3
5
3
1
2
4
4
2

14. Near- and Mid-Term Projects
1. ESP North County Pump Stations
2. ESP San Vicente Pump Station 3rd
Pump Drive and Power Supply
3. Pipelines P3/P4 Conversion
4. Mission Trails Flow Regulatory
Structure
4a. Lake Murray Control Valve
4b. South County Intertie
5. System Storage
6. System Isolation Valves (various
locations)
7. Asset Management Program (various
locations)
8. Facility Planning Studies
Potential Long-Term Projects
1. Pipeline 6
2. Second Crossover Pipeline
3. Camp Pendleton Desalination
4. Colorado River Conveyance
14
Partial List of Potential Projects in 2013 Master
Plan Update needing CEQA coverage
1
3
5
3
1
2
4
4
2

15. Link between Master Plan and Climate
Action Plan
Master Plan
Identify future facilities
and associated
emissions
Climate Action
Plan
Add new facilities to
baseline emissions
15
15

16.  Community-wide CAP vs. Government Operations CAP
Water Authority’s
Climate Action Plan
16
(Single purpose agency)(Multi-purpose agency)
Community Emissions
Government
Operations
Subset

17.  Water Authority will achieve state-aligned 2020
target in a cost-effective manner
 2035 target and beyond is uncertain; will be
revisited in future CAP updates by 2020
 Tracking mechanism in place to monitor progress
towards goals
Climate Action Plan: Summary
17
2009
(MT CO2e)
2020
(MT CO2e)
2035
(MT CO2e)
State-Aligned
Targets
9,325 7,927 4,756
Water Authority
BAU Emissions
9,325 (5,019) (3,975)

18.  Master Plan projects designed to be energy-
efficient
 Additional reduction opportunities include:
 Energy Conservation Opportunities from the Water
Authority’s 2012 Energy Audit
 Alternative electricity and transportation fuel
sources
 Hydroelectric: In-line and pumped storage
Climate Action Plan: Potential Future
Emissions Reductions
18

19. Environmental Coverage
Supplemental
Program EIR
Master Plan
Identify future facilities
needed and associated
emissions
Climate Action
Plan
Will add new facilities to
baseline emissions
19

20. 20
Proposed Project Modifications in 2013
Master Plan Update for CEQA Analysis in
SPEIR
Proposed Project Time Frame
System Isolation Valves 2015-2025
ESP – San Vicente PS Third
Pump Drive and Power Supply
2020-2025
Pipeline 3/Pipeline 4
Conversion
2020-2025
System Storage 2020-2025
Asset Management Program 2015-2025

21.  Aesthetics
 Agriculture and Forest
Resources
 Air Quality
 Biological Resources
 Cultural Resources
 Geology and Soils
 Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
 Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
 Hydrology and Water
Quality
 Land Use and Planning
 Mineral Resources
 Noise
 Population and Housing
 Public Services
 Recreation
 Transportation/Traffic
 Utilities and Service
System
 Other CEQA mandated
analyses including
Alternatives, Cumulative
Effects and Growth
Inducement
The SPEIR evaluated the following
potential environmental effects:
21
21

22.  All environmental impacts of near- and mid-
term Master Plan facilities and CAP
components are less than significant with
program-level mitigation
 Current analysis does not include any long-
term water supply or conveyance projects
undergoing feasibility studies
 Additional project-specific level analysis will
occur as Master Plan projects are further
developed
22
Environmental Impact Conclusions

23.  Written comment letters
 Four letters from State Agencies
 Five letters from Community Groups/Private
Organizations
 Three letters from individuals
 228 form letters from membership of San Diego
Chapter of Surfrider Foundation
 Public Hearing held January 9, 2014
 11 speakers provided oral comments
Comments received on Draft SPEIR
23

24. Comment Response
Climate Action Plan does not meet
CEQA Guidelines for tiering, scope
too narrow, selection of 2035 as
forecast year, reduction targets,
desalination consideration
Master Response 1 – Climate Action Plan
Failure to adequately consider higher
conservation targets than SBX7-7;
failure to adequately consider City’s
IPR
Master Response 2 – Conservation and Indirect
and Direct Potable Reuse
Minimize GHG emissions and
‘embedded energy’ in water supply
portfolio; develop a preferred
“loading order” of water supply
options
Master Response 3 - Embedded Energy in Water
Supply Planning
Explain analysis in 2010 UWMP
scenarios vs. 2013 Master Plan
Update scenarios
Master Response 4 – Master Plan and Urban
Water Management Plan Scenarios
SPEIR analysis not adequate; revise
and recirculate
Master Response 5 – Suggested Recirculation of
the Draft SPEIR
24
Summary of Main Comments and
Responses to Draft SPEIR

25. Comments focused on two main topics:
1. Growth inducement
 Addressed in final, certified 2003 Program EIR;
Supported conclusion of Supply from the West as
preferred alternative
 Supplemental PEIR updated the section with most
recent growth forecast information, meets all
requirements of CEQA and State law guiding
integrated planning
2. GHG Emissions
 All points are addressed in Master Response 1 –
Climate Action Plan
Additional letter received on Final SPEIR
25

26. Required Actions/Permits
 Water Authority Board of Directors
 Certify SPEIR, approve “Project” under CEQA, adopt
Findings of Fact and Mitigation Monitoring &
Reporting Plan, and approve Final 2013 Master Plan
Update and CAP
 No facility construction approvals as outcome
of process; therefore no permits required at
Program level
26

27. Staff Recommendation
It is recommended the Board adopt a Resolution
(attached) that:
1. Certifies the Final Supplemental Program EIR has
been completed in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and State CEQA
Guidelines, and reflects the independent judgment
of the Board;
2. Concurrently adopts the Environmental Findings of
Fact and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program;
3. Approves the Proposed Project modifications and
the Climate Action Plan (the “Project”);
4. Approves the 2013 Regional Water Facilities
Optimization and Master Plan Update; and
5. Authorizes the filing of a Notice of Determination.
27